Proposed Merger Of The APS And Asda

That's really my question as well. Precisely what problems is this supposed to help solve and how is this going to make things better for APS members at large? I don't think anyone has addressed that publicly yet. What makes this a good idea for the APS and philately in general? We need a good handle on that first.

That's a fair question. My primary objective in promoting the merger was to work toward creating a network of identifiable dealers online badged for customers. Today, almost anyone can sell online if they choose through several platforms. In our partnership announcement with HipStamp, APS members will be able to place a badge on their account, signifying they are an APS member, and buyers will be able to filter out only APS members when shopping.

Both ASDA and the Philatelic Traders Society in the UK have arrangements with ebay to badge on their sites. We'd like to use that not only to extend the trust branding online but also to give buyers another place to identify those who are using deceptive sales practices. I've read comments on past complaints to the ASDA. I will suggest that when filing a complaint to the ASDA, you can also file one with the APS. Many ASDA members are also APS members, even if they are not listed as dealer members.

The second motivation is to educate buyers and sellers on best practices for sales, online or otherwise, and help develop expertise. We have more than 180 members on our Expert Committees, but APEX, like other expertizing services, is seeing experts age, and the replacement is slow going. Just before the pandemic, Scott Trepel, President of Robert A. Siegel Galleries, wrote about this, and we discussed developing an expert academy. Now that things are trending back to pre-pandemic life, this is a good time to start.

If the merger does not build toward those to goals, I would not recommend it as practical to the APS Board or membership.

Scott, the objectives sound great, but the rub is in the details. As you know, vetting the dealers, handling the complaints, communicating the outcomes, and overall level of transparency is paramount for something like this to have value.

I posted the obvious issues with the current public APS discipline listing. How can someone be convicted of sex with a minor, lose their APS membership, and not be on the list? I know for a fact that this person worked VERY hard to scrub his online reputation after his conviction. As a very influential person in APRL/APS, I cannot help but wonder if he managed to get his name removed or never included. My point is, transparency will either make this effort work or not work.

Edit: My bad, his name is on the list.

Will the ability to lookup details of a badged seller (and be able to open a problem inquiry) be available to the public, or will this level of information only be available to APS members? Will all the problem inquiries outcomes be available?
Don

Don -- I monitored the case I believe you are discussing and forward it to the Board of Vice Presidents. It sparked a policy that allowed the APS Executive Director to suspend a member charged with certain crimes until the BVP heard the case.

Approved by the APS Board of Directors, April 17, 2018

In accordance with Section 3.11.5 of the American Philatelic Society Bylaws, upon notification of a felony charge or charged with crime involving philatelic material or allegations of crimen falsi (class of offenses involving deceit or falsification), the Executive Director or his designated Complaints Manager shall notify an APS member in writing of their suspension, pending resolution of the charge(s).

The Executive Director or his designated Complaints Manager shall notify the Board of Vice Presidents of this action at the same time. The Board may review the charges and, if they deem appropriate, take further action under the provision of Section 3.11.5.

The Executive Director shall notify the membership of the action by publication in The American Philatelist.

By tradition, complaints that result in disciplinary action are published. Those results are available to anyone, regardless of APS membership. I cannot speak for the BVP or the Board, but I would expect the policy to remain the same.

Scott

Scott,
Thank you for the reply, my concern is mostly with the ASDA which has a 'less than ideal' reputation when it concerns their transparency and responding to dealer complaints. So moving forward and assuming that the deltas between the two organizations are addressed, the APS dealer badge designations should carry cachet and be meaningful.
Don

I think you've raised some fair points that have to be factored into the discussions. My objective would never be to water down the APS Code of Ethics or weaken the trust we've fought for in the hobby. My goal is to find like-minded dealers that share the same goal to improve the current market. I don't want to paint every member of the ASDA with the same brush, many are APS members in good standing. It's ultimately about combining that capability for the sake of the marketplace. The due diligence process will help us determine where folks stand and, ultimately, help us move forward to achieve those goals.

We are evaluating the APS dealer membership at the same time, which may be the best option for our collective membership. This thread has been very helpful, and I'm grateful to everyone who has contributed or will contribute.

Important decisions that affect organizations like this meger should be decided by voting from all members.

I mentioned this in another forum, but I will also post it here. In my November column, I reference a survey we're sending out to APS members to gain some insight into our current services and opportunities to add other services, but we will also ask specifically about the merger and the objectives we are trying to accomplish. We typically get twice as many members participating in the survey than we do from our elections process.

Scott

Scott,

A survey question could be why some did not vote.

I always vote but do not really think it matters. There are few contested offices and no issues requiring a specific choice. The bios are generally bland without asserting issues.

For example if APS made the APS-ASDA question an election choice you may get more participation.

I understand the concept; I once orchestrated blocking a constitutional amendment from being on the ballot in 2004, so we could get it on the ballot for our re-election in 2006. It helped run the numbers up on our margin in a down year for the party.

In 2013, we had a contested APS election and proposed bylaws changes and decent participation. In 2016, a somewhat contested election and okay participation. 2019 was the uncontested re-election slate, so participation was lower. 2022, turnout was at 2016 level for numbers and higher as a percentage of membership, even though we had an uncontested election.

I doubt this issue will be on the table either way by 2025 - so a survey is a more cost-effective way to get instant feedback.

Scott

until the large selling entities can be induced to clean up their act or work with us to tighten standards in a meaningful way I do not feel the proposed solution will help the APS.

Why not just put the question to membership through the APS website when you have solid information to present?

How much could that cost?

I am not putting that on or taking it off the table as an option. The number of variables present right now is so great discussing every hypothetical to a conclusion makes no sense.

We're at the front end of a negotiation that might be over without a conclusion - so it's better to stay focused on the issues at hand (as much about the goals we aim to achieve than the one act I proposed to get there).

I'm not sure why asking the question of whether it even makes sense seems so problematic. An overwhelming majority of APS members don't use this or any other forum. We'll get more than a quarter of members to respond to a survey, many of whom express thanks for being asked.

From my point of view, getting feedback on this and other issues in the months ahead provides more clarity and goodwill than, "Here it is, take it or leave it."

Scott

I just do not think the ASDA is negotiating from a position of strength. The ASDA membership is a lot more discontented with their group than the APS. If the ASDA has any "market power" it does not seem to be showing.

But, I recognize show dealers pay the way for shows and this has to be yet another nail in the coffin on show dealers. The societies need to pick up more of the tab. If there are fewer shows, it is because of dealers and not societies wanting them. It would be interesting to calculate the space used in shows and how much each is paying for their share like exhibitors.

That is part of the reason for the 1995 rise of the National Stamp Dealers Association, NSDA.

Now I am not comparing the ASDA with the NSDA other to say the NSDA logo is more eye catching on ebay.

EDIT: I tried to post screenshots, something I have done previously, but today the SCF software now doesn't like the PGN extensions on the screenshots. The previous posting used PGN extension screenshots. Oh well, guess I was lucky then.